If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

In the Footsteps of Magna Charta - An English AAR

In the Footsteps ofMagna Charta

An English AAR for Europa Universalis II
Written by Katapraktoi
12th of October, 2005

Introduction

The document Magna Charta

Magna Charta – a document written in 1215 in England, regulated the rule of the English king. It had all begun after the year 1066 when William the Conqueror had defeated the Saxon king Harald II at the battle of Hastings. When William claimed the throne of the new England, he and the Normans created a branch from the general rule that held Europe in an iron fist – the feudal system.

Seeing the effects of a feudal system where only the retainers in direct decent would swear allegiance to their ruler – and thus the second layer of retainers had no legal loyalty to their master – a new more controlled feudal system had to be created. The Normans created a feudal system where all retainers, no matter how low or high their nobility status were, had to give their allegiance to their king.

The old French feudal system had the disadvantage that the lower ranking retainers
only swore allegiance to their direct master, so they could war on the king

The new English system made the king's position safer
since all retainers had to swear direct allegiance to him

Because of this more centralised system of power, and an expanding idea by the English kings that succeeded William the Conqueror, England grew to become one of the most powerful kingdoms in Europe by the thirteenth century. The power of the English king grew so immense that his own barons began to question him. By 1199, when Richard the Lionheart died, his brother John claimed the English throne and (presumably, though never proved) assassinated Richard’s son Arthur of Brittany. John’s way of gaining the crown appalled the baron’s in England and the people in France had rather seen Richard’s son become the next king of England.

This would become the first of three failures that would finally lead to the English barons’ revolt against their king. John’s second mistake was that he was unable to retake the French lands that were taken by the French king Philip Augustus. The barons demanded that he would feed the war effort, and although John tried to launch an attack at France eight years later, John’s efforts were halted in the battle of Bouvines in 1214.

John’s third and last mistake was to quarrel with the Catholic Church about the appointment of the office of Archbishop of Canterbury. John wanted to appoint his own bishop while the Church – according to the laws of thirteenth century ecclesiastical laws – claimed that the right to appoint bishops in Catholic countries lay within their power. John lost the quarrel with the Church when England was placed under the sentence of an interdict – the national equivalent of an excommunication for an individual person – which would not be cancelled until John accepted Church authority. In 1213 John accepted the Church’s will and his fate was sealed.

King John’s ineptness had made the baron’s in England gather their armies respectively and gather at London. On June 10th in 1215, they took London by force and forced the king to sign the document which came to be known as the Articles of the Barons. In return, the barons renewed their allegiance to King John, and they composed yet another document of their agreement. This document came to be known as Magna Charta. Although a distant idea, Magna Charta came to be a sort of forerunner of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries’ constitutions that were introduced for monarchs. Magna Charta introduced 61 clauses that limited the king’s power, and which states that a council of twenty-five barons would have the right to forcefully remove a king if his rule became too inappropriate. King John had to accept that he had to let go of some rights and respect the law. The king would now in other words, be bound by law like every other Englishman, and not above it, as had been the case before.

In the Footsteps of Magna Charta

Hello and welcome to my new AAR! This will be my second AAR that I am writing, and my first for Europe Universalis II. My other AAR concerns Victoria, but now that I have aquired this frustratingly great game I just have to play it! Therefore I think it might be good for me to point out that my experience with EUII is a bit limited, I have only played it for a month or two. But I hope that everything will work out well anyway since I am playing a pretty easily manageble country.

I have played England once before and made it to the early 1500s, but then I got information about this AGCEEP so I deleted all my saves and installed that instead. So now I am playing England in a totally new campaign game. Which should be fun!

I am going to try to write this AAR in two ways, both from a more narrtive aspect concerning main characters, and in a second more informative approach where I list what happens in the game, troop movement and battles and such. I hope that these two approaches will work together to form a comprehendable AAR that will be fun to read.

Any sort of critique is gladly accepted. You are very welcome to point out both good and bad aspects of my writing and of course gameplay as well.

Now for some of my goals as England. I am of course aiming at becoming a colonial power as Britain did in reality. My goals will be pretty obvious, the North American colonies and islands, India, parts of Africa and perhaps Australia as well. Pretty much what the British did acquire in real life. Perhaps not too exiting, though some other areas might just be grabbed in the fun of it all. France for example...

In any case, if it is possible, I will try to finish this AAR, and maybe even continue in Victoria if that is possible. I have no idea if AGCEEP can be converted into Victoria like the Vanilla version is able. I hold my hopes high!

I have no idea what the so-called Badboy-wars are, so I am just going to go for it! Anyone who declares war on me will get their fair share of the action, and if I see a nation that is ripe, then they are in trouble as well!

I must be #1 in the end of the game (in Victory points) to have completed my real goal.

I think that is it for now. An update will be posted in the coming days. I hope that you will look forward to it, and that you will like it as well of course! As mentioned, any and all posts are welcome.

Hmm, with forced annex off that will change a lot of things. For example, if I understand correctly, the Turks cannot annex the Byzantines (unless AGCEEP has an event for this). Ditto for Castile vs. Granada.

You do know that turning Force Annex of you cannot annex any Pagans bb-free, don't you? You'll have to force-convert them first, then vassalize them in a next war, then diploannex them. Furthermore, every state you cannot force-convert to your religion will never be annexable. It could also seriously hamper Spain and the Ottomans, as Jwolf pointed out. Last but not least, you will never have the bb-expensive pleasure of hitting that "Annex" button yourself at 100% warscore . It will prevent extreme blob-forming I guess, but is this really what you want?

Well, it's your game, as I often say, so good luck with it. Don't worry about BB-wars, they only hit you on higher difficulty levels (or one, if I'm not mistaking, only on very hard).

What?! Is that what Forces annexation means? Holy crap, I didn't know it was something good. I had got the idea that it did not force one-province countries to accept the annexation proposition when faced with one from an invading country. I had no idea it affected this whole religion-war thingy. So what you are saying is that I for example cannot annex the small Native American country with only three provinces right next to Washington DC, even though I have taken all their provinces and destroyed their army?

I think I had Forces annexation on the last time I played as England in Vanilla EUII, and I think I've encountered a difference from there. The armies duke it out a lot this time instead of leaving 5/6 of it to escape the battle once the morale has worn out. When I play now, I totally destroy the enemy army in two battles instead of twenty. It really bothered me before, but it doesn't happen anymore. So if that is Forced annexation connected, then I am still glad in a way that I turned it off.

We'll see how it goes. I haven't played such a long time yet, so I am way back until I can even begin to explore America. If I blew it, I'll just have to make a new game with Forces annexation turned on. ^_^

What?! Is that what Forces annexation means? Holy crap, I didn't know it was something good. I had got the idea that it did not force one-province countries to accept the annexation proposition when faced with one from an invading country. I had no idea it affected this whole religion-war thingy. So what you are saying is that I for example cannot annex the small Native American country with only three provinces right next to Washington DC, even though I have taken all their provinces and destroyed their army?

I think I had Forces annexation on the last time I played as England in Vanilla EUII, and I think I've encountered a difference from there. The armies duke it out a lot this time instead of leaving 5/6 of it to escape the battle once the morale has worn out. When I play now, I totally destroy the enemy army in two battles instead of twenty. It really bothered me before, but it doesn't happen anymore. So if that is Forced annexation connected, then I am still glad in a way that I turned it off.

We'll see how it goes. I haven't played such a long time yet, so I am way back until I can even begin to explore America. If I blew it, I'll just have to make a new game with Forces annexation turned on. ^_^

In fact Force Annex on or off does not change the way religion is of influence to any form of annexation. If on, nations can still refuse it, if they have for instance a large standing army or powerful allies still at war with you.
I does not influence battles I believe. It may be possible that you just had a different army composition. Besides, attacking low morale troops will cause them to run away instantly, with relatively few losses- you may have to fight them a few times, however, it boosts your warscore.

You're right in that it tends to save one province minors from being forcibly taken over...but the negatives are horrible. I think in AGCEEP the Byzantines will still fall (there's an event that gives it to the Turks if they CONTROL Thrace, which is still legal)...but Granada's not going anywhere.

Further, it won't save the German states. Austria will just diploannex its way north - that tends to be what it does anyway.

The colonial wars are going to get ... weird. With the exceptionally poor relations none of the Indians are going anywhere. (Forcevassal plus Diploannex will still work, but that's going to be REALLY hard with the constant negative modifier to relations due to bad relations.) I don't expect the AI to think of it: The Aztecs, Inca, Chimu, Zapotec and Maya will still be there.

What?! Is that what Forces annexation means? Holy crap, I didn't know it was something good.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Seriously, I believe the game is meant to be played with force annex on. I've never tried it otherwise; I just presume it would lead to very strange results. Could make for some interesting passages in your AAR, though.

In the Footsteps of Magna Charta - Prologue

Short historical prologue of England for

In the Footsteps of
Magna Charta

John Plantagenet

Not long after King John had signed Magna Charta in 1215, the Pope deemed the document null and void. The king had been forced to sign it and therefore it was not legitimate. As soon as John heard he had the Pope’s support, he broke his word on Magna Charta and ruled again in an absolute way. He had no plans on being forced to behave according to laws. After all, he was the King of England, and nobody but God ruled his fate. His actions provoked the First Barons’ War. The war would be fought between King John and the son of Philip Augustus, Prince Louis. This was because the English barons turned to Louis as he was the heir to the French throne, and he agreed to invade England in their name.

King John signs Magna Charta under the threat of the English nobles

In 1216 John died in Dover after some severe fighting at the English fortress situated there. Louis had his army gathered there but could not take the fortress as its design would not let the prince use all of his troops to advance. However, when King John died – some speculate he was poisoned, other that he lost his mind. What is sure is that it was not in battle however – the reason to fight died with him and Prince Louis was victorious. With his victory, the English barons now saw that the one who would be closest to claim the throne of England was not John’s nine-year-old son Henry, but the French prince. This made the barons crown Henry in a rush, not even using a real crown, but a piece of a simple golden necklace.

Henry III

King Henry III

With Henry crowned, the throne of England was secure with him and the barons made Henry sign Magna Charta as king, however, omitting a few clauses, including the 61st clause. This 61st clause was the one mentioning that if twenty-five barons would meet they could force the king to resign. This made Henry more powerful than King John had been since there were fewer rules in Magna Charta for Henry to follow.

However, not all was over though. The French prince was still in England and had conquered a large portion of it. In addition, some barons were still loyal to the Frenchman, liking the idea of a French king in England better than an infant king. Henry’s guardian William Marshal was the one who would lead the royalist barons in their war against Prince Louis and the remaining barons. The war continued for a year until 1217 when the English royalist army prepared to move against French-controlled London where Louis’s temporary government had seated itself. Louis was going to try to counter-attack the English army, but in a naval battle in the Straits of Dover, the English navy destroyed the French convoy with reinforcements, and thus Louis’s plans for invasion came to and end.

The child king grew up under William Marshal’s guidance and came to be King Henry III when he came of age. During his reign a Second Barons’ War would pass. When Henry had reached majority he was eager to use his power as king, and he funded a major war in Sicily at the request of the Pope. Tensions for a civil war also grew higher when a French-born baron in English France married Henry’s sister without consulting with Henry first. This baron, Simon de Montfort, was a charismatic leader and he led an attack together with the now more and more concerned English barons against England in the 1260s. Montfort and Henry, accompanied by his son Edward Longshanks, met at the Battle of Lewes in 1264 where Henry was defeated and imprisoned together with his son by Montfort. The French baron and the rest of the English barons began to reform the country to a less absolute rule, giving the nobility a notable increase in power.

However, it would not work out as Montfort wanted when Edward succeeded in escaping and gathered a second royalist army. The rebels were beaten in battle in 1265 and revenge was exacted. The monarchy was restored and Henry put back to power. He died in 1272 leaving England to his son Edward I.

Edward Longshanks

Edward Longshanks, the victor of the
Scots rebellion led by William Wallace

Edward I - later also known as Longshanks because he was so tall - was a king who looked to the English provinces in France, but also to his own island. Edward would be fighting two successive wars against Wales in which they would be subdued. In 1284 Wales was finally controlled by Edward and in 1301 Edward made his son, also named Edward, Prince of Wales, and instituted that each monarch’s eldest son would receive this title in the future.

Edward then turned his gaze at Scotland. He had prepared to invade Scotland but had little use for the army that was put together. The Scots nobles accepted Edward I as the King of Scotland and Edward prepared for a marriage to incorporate Scotland for future generations. However, when the child queen Margaret of Scotland died before Edward could marry off his son, he had to choose a Scots heir instead of letting his son rule Scotland. Edward agreed to the Scots proposition and chose a prominent Scots successor named John Balliol. In 1293, John had to pay homage to Edward, where he was required to raise an army to help Edward in a war against France. This was too much for the Scots king and instead of helping England against France, John sent a messenger to France with the proposition of a joint attack on England. Edward then raised an army to meet with John and he went on a rampage through Scotland destroying several towns and finally reached Edinburgh where he took the Stone of Scone, or the Stone of Destiny, which was held sacred by the Scots. John had to accept defeat in order to save Scotland and he was imprisoned by Edward in the Tower of London where he renounced his right to the Scottish throne.

With John imprisoned, Edward enforced his control over Scotland and quelled all rebellions which sprang from his sacrilegious theft of the Stone. William Wallace was the main focus of the rebellion, but Edward was successful in capturing him after the Battle of Falkirk in 1298 and executed him in 1305. Edward wanted to continue to invade Scotland to incorporate it, and led an army commanded by the Scots noble Robert the Bruce. However, before he could seriously threaten Scotland, Edward died in 1307 and gave way for his son to take the English crown.

Edward II

Edward II, the first king to be deposed in England's history,
counted from William the Conqueror's rule

Edward II, ruled from 1307 when his father died, until January 1327 when he was deposed. Edward’s rule was filled with constant internal strife and revolts. He neglected his nobility forming a great discontent among the English barons, and his view of lower born people was not a very successful way of keeping the mob in place, to say the least. Edward’s weak rule led to an uprising by Robert the Bruce, the very same man who was going to help Edward invade Scotland. Robert had now formed a Scottish army and was conquering Scotland for his own gain, resulting in loss of power for the English. Edward tried to meet him but was utterly defeated at the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314 and had to drop all ideas of conquering Scotland for the moment.

After the war with Scotland, Edward had to look to his own lands. Civil strife was on the verge of engulfing the country, with Edward and loyal nobles on one side, and the Queen of France, Isabella – his own wife – on the other. As the civil war continued and Edward lost a continuous row of battles against the French queen and her English allies, Edward tried to flee by sea. His ship was intercepted and he was put in gaol in Kenilworth Castle long enough for Parliament at Westminster to depose him of his royal office and give the crown to his son Edward. Even with a new king, Isabella did not trust the English as they were seen as enemies except for this very short time of cooperation against the recently deposed king. Therefore Isabella demanded Edward to be transferred to a prison that was French-friendly. He was moved to Berkley Castle where he later died in 1327. Some speculate that he was murdered.

Edward III

Edward III, the English king who started
The Hundred Years' War with France

In January 1327 Edward was crowned King of England, he was then fourteen years old. His reign would be one among few that would last for around fifty years, only comparable to Henry III among his predecessors. In his younger years, his mother Isabella ruled England efficiently through him until he reached majority and was married. When Isabella’s brother Charles IV, the king of France, died, Edward was the senior male heir that could claim the French throne (through his mother Isabella). His younger brother John, Earl of Cornwall, was the second senior heir, but others would follow later.

Edward waged war against Scotland to make in English dominated again and succeeded in this with help from his Scottish puppet-king Edward Balliol, the son of John Balliol who had defied Edward’s grandfather Edward I. With Scotland subdued, Edward turned to France.

Edward claimed that since he was the only living male senior heir to the French throne, he had the legal right to incorporate France into England. This was actively opposed by the French nobles who claimed that he was violating the old Salic law which stated that heirs who were bound to the throne could not claim it if they were connected through a female line. Since Edward was connected through just that – by his mother Isabella – the rightful heir to the French throne would be Edward’s cousin Philip VI, a son of Philip III.

The French nobles’ move angered Edward into attacking France in 1337. This would be the first action that provoked The Hundred Years’ War, a war that would continue longer than a hundred years, and with pauses in the battling, but nonetheless war. In 1340 Edward proclaimed himself King of France. At the Battle of Crecy in 1346 Edward defeated a French army with the company of his son Edward. In 1350 Philip VI died and was succeeded by John II who continued the war against England. Six years later he was defeated by Edward’s son alone at the Battle of Poitiers. The French had to pay a ransom of three million crowns and in 1360 when the first phase of the war was over, the Treaty of Brétigny made English influence in France rise to heights that had never before been seen.

Richard II

Richard II, he succeeded his grandfather to the throne of England
but was deposed because he neglected important English elements

Despite his having a son, Edward was not succeeded by him. Edward IV, also known as the Black Prince, died ten years before his father did, and so the grandson of Edward was the one who became the next King of England. His name was Richard.

Edward IV - The Black Prince - never had the opportunity to become king, he died before his father did

Richard should not have become the next King of England, had his older brother not died in his infancy. When his father Edward the Black Prince died and then his grandfather Edward III, he became king at the age of only ten. His guardian John of Gaunt – who was the younger brother of Edward the Black Prince and son of Edward III – would act as king in his place until 1381 when he successfully dealt with a peasant mob at the age of fourteen. The revolt of the peasants was led by Wat Tyler, and though there were several thousand discontent rebels, he made peace with the ringleaders for the moment. Their rebellion was later punished by death and Richard never lived up to the promises he had given on that day to the mob.

Richard’s continued rule became an disliked one, especially by the nobles. Richard appointed a council of his most trusted barons while the nobles who had been demoted formed the Lords Appellant. They demanded that things were to return to normal and that war with France should be concentrated. Richard’s plans of peace with France did not appeal to the Appellant. They forced the English Parliament to remove Richard’s councillors with the motive that he was still a minor and not fit to rule. This made Richard arrest the leader of the Appellant, the Earl of Arundel, but the rest of the Appellant’s armies overpowered the young king’s smaller army quickly and Richard became arrested in return. He was put in the Tower of London where he bided his time.

As he grew in age, so he did in power. He successfully had the Earl of Arundel executed and escaped his imprisonment. He had the rest of the Lords Appellant either arrested or exiled and resumed power as king. He instantly made preparations for war in Ireland, focused on bringing the Green Island into English control. However, when he left England he made it vulnerable for attack. Richard’s guardian John of Gaunt had had a son, Henry Bolingbroke, who was to inherit all John’s lands. But when John died, Richard had instead confiscated the land and banished Henry from England. Now, with Richard gone, Henry made an attempt to invade England and reclaim his legal domains. He had been provided with an army by the French king and landed in Yorkshire. He had little trouble conquering his father’s lands though as Richard’s rule was worrying for the English nobility. From the start, Henry had only wanted to retake his own land, but spurred by the nobility, he was offered to take the English crown for himself.

As Richard returned from Ireland he was cornered by Henry’s army in Wales and taken to London where he was imprisoned once again. He admitted defeat and was taken before Parliament where he officially denounced his claim to the throne. In 1400, Richard was placed in Pontefract Castle where he died in February.

Henry IV

Henry IV’s reign was a short one and filled with internal rebellions. It was only because of his son’s superior military skills that these rebellions were quelled and Henry could stay in power. He was afraid of assassination plots and had the future King of Scotland, James I, captured and imprisoned through his whole reign. He died in 1413 and succeeded by his son, Henry who became Henry V, King of England and the strong ruler of the English by the beginning of 1419.

Henry V, the ruler of England in the Year of our Lord Fourteen Nineteen

Thank you everybody for replying! I love reading replies, whatever they contain.

It is a shame that Forces annexation was a good thing, or rather that I did not turn it on as it was a good thing... In any case, I have made it to 1424 now I think, so I think I will continue playing like this. Wo knows, it may be fun to see what happens when you do turn FA off. So far it has worked pretty well against my French and Dauphine enemies.

The above prologue is a try to collect the most important happenings in English history from 1066 until 1419, though parts have been omitted, and some things have been severely shortened to make it easier to understand. Some sub-plots have had to be deleted in order to make the text comprehendable and not so darn boring/long to read. I still hope that what I have written is stuff that you find interesting, and I tried to get the bits and pieces that lead to the current king in 1419, Henry V. So if you know of an event that happened, that I haven't listen, then you are most welcome to inform of it, but I dont' think I will edit it into the text. It took me about six hours to write this including finding decent pictures. But most of all the time went on trying to figure out the plotting and the relationships between all these guys. It seems to me as if they are all brothers and sisters, fathers and sons, cousins and relatives all over. wouldn't surprise me if the caliph of Egypt was somehow a distant cousin to the mother-in-law of the king's third son... Oh well...

And hey, notice the Coat of Arms that belong to Henry V, it is the one that England uses as a flag in EUII. I just had to point it out. ^^ So with that said, I hope you have fun reading the prologue, but I am not sure if you should trust the material 100% since I am no über-historian of English history, and also that you will look forward to my first chapter in this long story! To be posted within the week. Or the next one...

Interesting piece of history! You have one major advantage considering the conquest of France: it is controlled by events. You'll be able to conquer Ile-de-France through event and even inherit France. Make sure to use your commanders (especially Henry V) to the max and quickly besiege and capture all provinces belonging to Dauphine. That will trigger the "Collapse of the Kingdom of Burgess"-event. Vendee will go to Brittany, Guyenne to Aragon and Langeudoc to Province yet most of the rest of the provinces of Dauphine will go to you and after that, you can still force-vassalize Dauphine in the peace talks. So, event without FA you can conquer France.

IMHO it is better to force-vassalize and later diplo-annex your neighbours in the early game so it costs less badboy.

Thank you CatKnight and Grundius! I had hopes that the prologue would be somewhat read-worthy and also set the mood for the coming in-game updates.

I must say though, that I have managed to turn Force annexation on now. And by God, that was lucky I did! In about 1427 I defeated the one province nation Orleans, and I was unable to annex them, even though they only had one province. I could only press the demand button. So nothing happened. I turned FA on and now I could annex them, obviously.

It might have been interesting to see how game-play would have turned out with FA off, but then I reminded myself of the Native American nations. If I cannot annex a European one province nation, then imagine the distant American nation of another culture. It was too horrifying. So sorry for those of you who had been looking forward for a FA-free game, I am now goign to continue with FA on.

I have not had the Collapse of the Kingdom of Burgess. I defeated the Dauphine and took most of his northern lands and the coast to the west. So they are still there, instead Burgundy is growing stronger and everybody hates me. Litterally. Even little one province nation Luxembourg declared war on me! And Foix also! That was amazing. And I had major trouble all over the place so I couldn't defeat them even though they had one province because they had thirty thousand (30000 yes!!) soliders each compared to my twenty five in total, which I had to spread along all my borders, and on my home island as well. You'll see all this in my next update. It's crazy I tell you. I think I have too much badboy, but I am wondering why I am getting badboy, when the otehrs are attackign me? I make white peace but my BB keeps rising so other nations feel urged to attack me. This has made me take I think six loans so far just to keep the army maintinence (maintenance? what ever...) up.

I get all kinds of strange events, I will list most of them later, and you'll see my situation. I even get into wars because of these events. It's really bothering, but I hope I will make it out alive without too much BB in the end so I can start building tax collectors and go for some more research, right now it is goign slowly because of the war exhaustion.

I hope you'll look forward to the comign update, I have just finished playing the timeperiod I had in mind, so now I just need to write all this down. Until then!

A very interesting and in depth prologue. As for the BB, much of it probably came when you annexed Orleans and land taken from the Dauphine. It should not be enough to put you over the limit, but England takes on a lot of BB at the beginning. It's been so long since I played them though, I imagine others have better advice for you than I could give.

And it's best that you got FA back on. I think you'll enjoy yourself more. I'll keep reading at any rate.

You had a 100% victory over Dauphiné yet did not get the collapse event? Odd. Indeed, then you will rake up bb points. 1 for each province you do not have a claim on so even if you're defending. Don't worry too much though, at easy I believe it only influences your stability cost and everybody starts hating you. You can buy friends and low stablity is more of a nuisance than anything else on easy.

Right. They're mad at you, this isn't a BB war. The solution is to build troops.... at a point they'll become more afraid than angry and stop warring. Difficult, I know. Incidentally see if you can release any vassals (besides France of course.) If so, that can reduce BB.

I don't play AGC-EEP so I don't know how the 'collapse' event triggers. Anyone know what could have happened?